We can't truly know what would have happened. Also nothing promotes change more than when everyone feels the hurt as is some did some didn't not enough to make an out cry for change. Isn't that always how the masses are controlled make sure enough are happy to keep the status quo with a pinch of fear of what could have been to motivate them. Never the less it just backs up my theory if there to big to fail they represent a constant threat to the general well being of a Nation of the world. When it comes to corporations and the public good smaller is the new better.
We should have let the banks burn so to speak and got rid of the old growth that is stifling new growth in it's shadow. Also government needs to do it's job and that is not working for big business.
It is also very common approach. Here we have two problems, some people think that whole 2008 crysis had been made to reduce the pressure and keep situation under control. So, no one ever intended to touch core financial structures. Second problem is that if you destroy financial system, it'll have fast and unfortunate consequences in the real economy. Most probably system won't stand it and elites could lose full control. US and EU people won't be winning either. It'll be just big, bloody redestribution of food and resources.
Short or a revolution I think the average man is in trouble. During the bank crisis we should have looked to nature, As we now know it is sometimes better to let a forest burn as it leads to all sorts of new growth. We should have let the banks burn so to speak and got rid of the old growth that is stifling new growth in it's shadow. Also government needs to do it's job and that is not working for big business.
In my opinion if a company is to big to fail it is to big and government should break it up for the good and safety of it's people.
@Vitaliy Yes, I'm familiar with Austrian School, I read a book called "Road to Serfdom" by Hayek. I feel these are the principles that lead to everything that happened in 2006. Alan Greenspan, who dined with Ayn Rand, agrees despite years beholden to the Hayek orthodoxy that started in Reagan's first term.
Bubbles are created by lack of government oversight
the market will discover the real price of real estate.. the reason for the real estate bubble was government programs to give credit to any breathing person.
Thing is that @Ebacherville share Austrian school point of view. @brianluce, you can get good book and look at the arguments they use.
It's cynical to say greed is at root of human nature.
I never said anything about "root of human nature". It is just part of human nature.
The system implementation is faulty and not its principles
This is why someone think that simple solutions might work. Nope. System has defects at all levels, from core principles to implementation.
Well the market is little retarded i guess because it discovered them after the fact that everything is ruined. Credits are given by the banks not the governments. The greed of the banks created the bubble. Bank ceos still got paid well anyway. And as far as being ahead of the game...you know one day somebody will get ahead of you, just like that in a blink of an eye. Its plain statistics and the rule of your game. Stash that gold really well now ; )
the market will discover the real price of real estate.. the reason for the real estate bubble was government programs to give credit to any breathing person. if you got a job, you got a house.. Most defaulted, driving prices into the ground after all the foreclosures were on the market. But I took advantage of it, 50 acres for 8k.. In some ways I like the government messing with the markets , if you know how to play it. Either way as long as you realize whats going on you can be ahead of the game. As a recommendation , buy physical gold and silver now.. inflation is your friend.
Bubbles are created by lack of government oversight. Deregulation is widely cited as the main cause of the real estate bubble. Repeal of Glass Steagall was instrumental. As for governments causing monopolies, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act
@Vitaliy It's cynical to say greed is at root of human nature. Even if you're right, it's still cynical or at best pessimistic. We know the appetites drive many actions and don't typically serve the overall good, but you cannot deny humans also have higher impulses as well and it's here where salvation and hope live. Embracing greed as our destiny surely will self fulfill.
@Ebacherville The system implementation is faulty and not its principles. Fix the holes in the system that allow this 3rd generation abuse of it, but don't punish people that DO need assistance. If somebody has been laid of work lately because of unjust "free"(?) market speculation and is about to be thrown on the street with his family, even after working for many years loyally for the same company,well there should be some social net to save this family and give them free medical assistance if needed.
And in times like this, governments should get involved as much and as powerful as possible to stop all this finacial speculation schemes and rumors economies! But it won't happen ever because they are puppets to the same corporation lobbies and interests. Democracy bullocks!
Here in EU we see the governments as the ones to break monopolies - look what happened to microsoft in Europe a few years back and what might happen to google predy soon.
government needs to be un-involved in business and personal issues like health care etc, they are the creators of bubbles and monopolies.. the governments roll is to protect personal freedoms and that is all. People will take care of them self's if they have to all this government hand out crap has to stop. Here in the USA we have people that are 3rd generation welfare recipients.. because its easier to game the system than work. they do it by choice because its simply easier. Just like water flows it will always go the least way of resistance.
Everyone has different understanding of "basic necessities".
I believe there still some universal principles on what is basic necessities, for example food, house, work, education, healthcare system. Basic cornerstones for societies. Some have them some don't , but they still exist as a basic necessities. At least my humble experience from 4 Continents so far.
How it is different from the human nature?
Vitaly, do think human nature is bad in its core?
And how you want to "take it out from the equation"?
Maybe by the only choice left - stop buy things we don't need. Corporations need markets. Disrupt the market of certain products and you would see change in their producers. There are no ethics involved in their decisions. If a certain product is not sold well, it is discontinued. so by making a smart choice, what is good and sustainable, education needed on the matter of course, what to buy and what not one directly influences corporations at least on the short run. So for example if there is a demand for solar panels, just to bring the topic again and there is a profit to be made of it, they will produce them.
With banks is a little more complex and vicious circle.
How it is different from the human nature? And how you want to "take it out from the equation"?
You restore the rule of law. And change those laws that allow people playing monopoly. The large majority of the people is asking for this, so in a democracy it's only a matter of time. Unless we go back to totalitarian systems of control, but i don't even want to talk about that.
Everyone has different understanding of "basic necessities".
Food, housing and higher education.
And global competition always work, it just becomes more and more complicated.
It's being made complicated through all these fancy theories and models. But i agree with @dtr. There's nothing really different the day before and the day after the financial collapse began. There's just a very complicated list of who owes who, and they should have reversed this, like Matt Taibbi said. Instead they kept all this debt, flooded the economy with QEs and bailouts and hoped for it to trickle down. This is not complicated. It is called stealing.
if you take out corporate greed from the equation
How it is different from the human nature? And how you want to "take it out from the equation"?
global competition can work for the benefit of people and everyone can have basic necessities.
Everyone has different understanding of "basic necessities".
And global competition always work, it just becomes more and more complicated.
@dtr so if you and me and the not so small network of people related to us and then to them etc, etc... would like to hold on to the EU we might as well influence its existence. at least this is the concept. Just like the buying habits. or we can just be as negative as possible and let it take its own logical course. for sure its easy to be negative and on the contrary it takes a lot courage and persistence to let good things happen. our micro environments influence the big picture - just like the pixels ; )
Unfortunately, there is a very big external push to destroy it. it become too powerful to soon and threatened the older deal brokers. this is what is bothering me. rating agencies decide which country is worth it and which no. oh, btw most of them are US based (just a coincidence of course)or at least very related to the US.
@dtr so you don't see anything positive about the EU for example the things i was referring to ?
Sure I do! For one, I've lived in 3 EU countries so far and studied in 2 of them so I've been very much enjoying the freedom of movement inside the EU.
I totally support the ideal view of the EU you depicted. It remains to be seen how long it will hold though, with Greece threatened by expulsion from the Euro as first sign of desintegration. The EU started with combined economic and political ideals. From the current discourse it seems its reason for existence is now only economic (this is not only an issue in the EU). That economy is inherently competitive and will lead to internal conflicts and ultimately the disbanding of the EU, if it doesn't get retied by political/ideological bounds.
@dtr so you don't see anything positive about the EU for example the things i was referring to ?
as far as the choices you mentioned, i believe this is the ONLY real "democracy" at the moment. make a selection in your consuming habits - that is the real power to change anything since everything depends on this. for example reduce the use of your 3(!!!) family cars when possible and as a result the artificially inflated price of gas would go down pretty quickly if it is a global or at lest a bigger region trend. oh wait, maybe this will bring the end of the world which is very complex and domino like connected. well be it. otherwise is just a (scaremongering) chit chat over a coffee , beer or whatever is to your liking (of course made by your favorite multinational corporation that is!)
and just for the record do you leave in EU or US ?
EU
Quite typical point of view that are in line with previous solution. But this, second "solution", is ten folds more dangerous.
How is it more dangerous if people think about what the consequences are of what they do, how they live, what they buy and eat, etc on the global scale?
The big question in that respect is whether humans can ever reach a global awareness that will make them act in respect of the entire planet, and not just their person/household/family/region/country. The notion of countries as independent units will have to change as well.
Quite typical point of view that are in line with previous solution. But this, second "solution", is ten folds more dangerous.
but it's going to take a lot more pain before we get there, eg. wars over natural resources.
Yep, but pain (read - hundreds of millions that are not required by global market), are necessary. :-) Quite peaceful POV, isn't it?
@dtr EU have never had illusions on competition. its a few powerful economies that drive the whole union in reality. but for me EU is good because its a step in what you are wishing for a global awareness. People(most of them) move, work and live wherever they choose mixing cultures and backgrounds reducing the risk of a military confrontation over resources. at lest within the union. this one one of the reasoning behind the whole idea. then of course there will be the EU vs. US vs. China vs. India vs. Brazil vs. whatever next bigger entity, so yes a long way to go...(here"..." is intended ; )
and just for the record do you leave in EU or US ?
Despite mass media claims and education we live in highly competitive world. And for almost every country viable solutions include parts that are not viable for others.
Indeed. And in the European Union people even had the illusion that all countries can compete with each other and all be winners at the same time. How shortsighted.
The big question in that respect is whether humans can ever reach a global awareness that will make them act in respect of the entire planet, and not just their person/household/family/region/country. The notion of countries as independent units will have to change as well. One thing we can thank big business for is that they already started doing that for us ;)
I think we can reach that global awareness and respect but it's going to take a lot more pain before we get there, eg. wars over natural resources.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!